There are 15 messages in this issue.
Topics in this digest:
1a. Re: Phone*ic notation: Geminates
From: Eugene Oh
1b. Re: Phone*ic notation: Geminates
From: Padraic Brown
1c. Re: Phone*ic notation: Geminates
From: Garth Wallace
1d. Re: Phone*ic notation: Geminates
From: Padraic Brown
1e. Re: Phone*ic notation: Geminates
From: Daniela Amsler
1f. Re: Phone*ic notation: Geminates
From: Eric Christopherson
1g. Re: Phone*ic notation: Geminates
From: Padraic Brown
2.1. Re: Linguistic literature on conlangs
From: Padraic Brown
3a. Re: from Roger
From: Padraic Brown
3b. Re: from Roger
From: Scott Hlad
3c. Re: from Roger
From: Eric Christopherson
3d. Re: from Roger
From: Jeffrey Daniel Rollin-Jones
3e. Re: from Roger
From: Sam Stutter
4a. Re: Phonology Imitation
From: Peter Collier
4b. Re: Phonology Imitation
From: Peter Collier
Messages
________________________________________________________________________
1a. Re: Phone*ic notation: Geminates
Posted by: "Eugene Oh" un.do...@gmail.com
Date: Sat Feb 25, 2012 4:00 pm ((PST))
On 25 Feb 2012, at 23:40, Sam Stutter <samjj...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 25 Feb 2012, at 21:49, Eugene Oh <un.do...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> I'm curious as to the distinction in the realisation between the two.
>
> That may have been the question you were asking, but it wasn't the one I was
> answering ;)
>
No, it was a new question - so what is the distinction? (:
Also to clarify I didn't write the below. (no personal opinion on the content,
just as a matter of clarification)
>> why not? you just hold the stop twice as long before releasing. i.e. for a
>> duration of two "chronemes." note the arabic example above.
>
> This is why I've learnt to put everything I write in quote marks, because I
> know someone's going to say that :) Didn't realise it was possible. Cool.
Messages in this topic (15)
________________________________________________________________________
1b. Re: Phone*ic notation: Geminates
Posted by: "Padraic Brown" elemti...@yahoo.com
Date: Sat Feb 25, 2012 4:29 pm ((PST))
--- On Sat, 2/25/12, Matthew Boutilier <bvticvlar...@gmail.com> wrote:
> From: Matthew Boutilier <bvticvlar...@gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [CONLANG] Phone*ic notation: Geminates
> To: conl...@listserv.brown.edu
> Date: Saturday, February 25, 2012, 4:27 PM
> >
> > As Eugene says, it has more to do with syllabification
> than with any kind
> > of phonetic distinctions. If you assume that the
> geminate consonant is
> > split between syllables (not always a foregone
> conclusion), it's convenient
> > to double the consonant symbol to represent gemination
> and to place the
> > syllable boundary between the doubled symbols.
> >
>
> that sounds logical. so probably:
> it. *fiamma* "flame" = /'fjam.ma/ or /'fjamma/
> but
> arab. ʕadd "amount" = /ʕæd:/
>
> You "can't" have long stops. Because they're stops.
> >
>
> why not?
Because a stop is just that -- the flow of air has ceased to flow. What
happens while you're holding a stop is really no different than what
you're doing while not phonating / making sound at all. I can hold my
tongue in the [d] position for many minutes. That doesn't mean I'm saying
or pronouncing an extremely long D!
I think what's really going on with these "long stops" is either a doubled
stop -- two [t] in succession, rather than just one -- or else a pause is
being inserted after the stop and before the next sound.
Clearly, if you can say a sound (or hiss a sibilant) for any length of
time, then it can be termed "long". If the airstream stops, and thus the
sound can not be said for any length of time, then there is really no such
thing as "long" for that sound.
So, /am:::&k/ contains a really long [m]; while /at....t&k/ simply has a
longish pause between the two [t]s.
> you just hold the stop twice as long before
> releasing. i.e. for a
> duration of two "chronemes." note the arabic example above.
> matt
Padraic
Messages in this topic (15)
________________________________________________________________________
1c. Re: Phone*ic notation: Geminates
Posted by: "Garth Wallace" gwa...@gmail.com
Date: Sat Feb 25, 2012 8:52 pm ((PST))
On Sat, Feb 25, 2012 at 4:29 PM, Padraic Brown <elemti...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> --- On Sat, 2/25/12, Matthew Boutilier <bvticvlar...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> From: Matthew Boutilier <bvticvlar...@gmail.com>
>> Subject: Re: [CONLANG] Phone*ic notation: Geminates
>> To: conl...@listserv.brown.edu
>> Date: Saturday, February 25, 2012, 4:27 PM
>> >
>> > As Eugene says, it has more to do with syllabification
>> than with any kind
>> > of phonetic distinctions. If you assume that the
>> geminate consonant is
>> > split between syllables (not always a foregone
>> conclusion), it's convenient
>> > to double the consonant symbol to represent gemination
>> and to place the
>> > syllable boundary between the doubled symbols.
>> >
>>
>> that sounds logical. so probably:
>> it. *fiamma* "flame" = /'fjam.ma/ or /'fjamma/
>> but
>> arab. ʕadd "amount" = /ʕæd:/
>>
>> You "can't" have long stops. Because they're stops.
>> >
>>
>> why not?
>
> Because a stop is just that -- the flow of air has ceased to flow.
Yes, and you can do that for a short time or a longer time.
> What
> happens while you're holding a stop is really no different than what
> you're doing while not phonating / making sound at all.
Exactly. Well, unless it's a voiced stop, because you can continue
voicing for a bit after air has ceased to flow out of the mouth, until
too much pressure builds up behind the point of articulation.
> I can hold my
> tongue in the [d] position for many minutes. That doesn't mean I'm saying
> or p
Sure it does.
> I think what's really going on with these "long stops" is either a doubled
> stop -- two [t] in succession, rather than just one -- or else a pause is
> being inserted after the stop and before the next sound.
The release is usually considered part of the plosive, so if there's a
longer pause between the point where the airflow halts and where it
resumes, you have a long stop.
> Clearly, if you can say a sound (or hiss a sibilant) for any length of
> time, then it can be termed "long". If the airstream stops, and thus the
> sound can not be said for any length of time, then there is really no such
> thing as "long" for that sound.
So you're saying that pauses don't have length?
Messages in this topic (15)
________________________________________________________________________
1d. Re: Phone*ic notation: Geminates
Posted by: "Padraic Brown" elemti...@yahoo.com
Date: Sat Feb 25, 2012 9:12 pm ((PST))
--- On Sat, 2/25/12, Garth Wallace <gwa...@gmail.com> wrote:
> From: Garth Wallace <gwa...@gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [CONLANG] Phone*ic notation: Geminates
> To: conl...@listserv.brown.edu
> Date: Saturday, February 25, 2012, 11:51 PM
> On Sat, Feb 25, 2012 at 4:29 PM,
> Padraic Brown <elemti...@yahoo.com>
> wrote:
> > --- On Sat, 2/25/12, Matthew Boutilier <bvticvlar...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >
> >> From: Matthew Boutilier <bvticvlar...@gmail.com>
> >> Subject: Re: [CONLANG] Phone*ic notation:
> Geminates
> >> To: conl...@listserv.brown.edu
> >> Date: Saturday, February 25, 2012, 4:27 PM
> >> >
> >> > As Eugene says, it has more to do with
> syllabification
> >> than with any kind
> >> > of phonetic distinctions. If you assume that
> the
> >> geminate consonant is
> >> > split between syllables (not always a
> foregone
> >> conclusion), it's convenient
> >> > to double the consonant symbol to represent
> gemination
> >> and to place the
> >> > syllable boundary between the doubled
> symbols.
> >> >
> >>
> >> that sounds logical. so probably:
> >> it. *fiamma* "flame" = /'fjam.ma/ or /'fjamma/
> >> but
> >> arab. ʕadd "amount" = /ʕæd:/
> >>
> >> You "can't" have long stops. Because they're
> stops.
> >> >
> >>
> >> why not?
> >
> > Because a stop is just that -- the flow of air has
> ceased to flow.
>
> Yes, and you can do that for a short time or a longer time.
Right. Note that it's not the *stop* itself that is being extended for a
space of time, but the silence that follows the stop. For example, if I
say the word "PRAT" right now and then go to bed without saying another
word until tomorrow morning, that doesn't mean that the final "T" of
"prat" has been going on for some seven or eight hours until I sit up and
say "TLE"!
> So you're saying that pauses don't have length?
Not at all. I am saying that the pause isn't part of the stop. It's like
playing a trumpet. If you tongue your notes, you get a nice TA-TA-TA-TA-TAA
effect. If you stop breathing through the instrument, thus stopping the
air stream, you're no longer "playing the trumpet" so much as having a
brass weight hanging from your face. Start buzzing again and the thing
blarts back to life.
All a matter of perspective. Mine is simply that when the air stream ceases
there are no continuant sounds being produced. A stop by definition is not
a continuant and therefore can not be lengthened. Dragging out this pause
is not comparable to dragging out an extended vowel or syllabic. YMMV.
Padraic
Messages in this topic (15)
________________________________________________________________________
1e. Re: Phone*ic notation: Geminates
Posted by: "Daniela Amsler" daniela.ams...@gmail.com
Date: Sat Feb 25, 2012 11:19 pm ((PST))
Let me insist, my point may be just empiric but it deserves to be explained,
then: in italian we have long consonants, and also long stops. These are
represented graphically as double consonant, as in 'appiattito' - flattened-
but are not said as a repeated 'p' or a repeated 't'.
If the difference between short and long stops is perceptible as to change a
word meaning, like in the example:
capello - (one) hair-
vs.
cappello- hat-
I assume it to mean that there ARE long stops.
And note that here I'm talking about unvoiced ones.
The 'length' of it resides in the time which passes from the moment of the
articulation (when my mouth prepares to form a labiodental as in 't') to the
moment of the air release. This time can be stretched a bit in a sort of pause
-if you want to call it so because there is no airflow- which is a distinctive
part of the word, in my opinion.
Il giorno 26-feb-2012, alle ore 05:51, Garth Wallace ha scritto:
> On Sat, Feb 25, 2012 at 4:29 PM, Padraic Brown <elemti...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> --- On Sat, 2/25/12, Matthew Boutilier <bvticvlar...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> From: Matthew Boutilier <bvticvlar...@gmail.com>
>>> Subject: Re: [CONLANG] Phone*ic notation: Geminates
>>> To: conl...@listserv.brown.edu
>>> Date: Saturday, February 25, 2012, 4:27 PM
>>>>
>>>> As Eugene says, it has more to do with syllabification
>>> than with any kind
>>>> of phonetic distinctions. If you assume that the
>>> geminate consonant is
>>>> split between syllables (not always a foregone
>>> conclusion), it's convenient
>>>> to double the consonant symbol to represent gemination
>>> and to place the
>>>> syllable boundary between the doubled symbols.
>>>>
>>>
>>> that sounds logical. so probably:
>>> it. *fiamma* "flame" = /'fjam.ma/ or /'fjamma/
>>> but
>>> arab. ʕadd "amount" = /ʕæd:/
>>>
>>> You "can't" have long stops. Because they're stops.
>>>>
>>>
>>> why not?
>>
>> Because a stop is just that -- the flow of air has ceased to flow.
>
> Yes, and you can do that for a short time or a longer time.
>
>> What
>> happens while you're holding a stop is really no different than what
>> you're doing while not phonating / making sound at all.
>
> Exactly. Well, unless it's a voiced stop, because you can continue
> voicing for a bit after air has ceased to flow out of the mouth, until
> too much pressure builds up behind the point of articulation.
>
>> I can hold my
>> tongue in the [d] position for many minutes. That doesn't mean I'm saying
>> or p
>
> Sure it does.
>
>> I think what's really going on with these "long stops" is either a doubled
>> stop -- two [t] in succession, rather than just one -- or else a pause is
>> being inserted after the stop and before the next sound.
>
> The release is usually considered part of the plosive, so if there's a
> longer pause between the point where the airflow halts and where it
> resumes, you have a long stop.
>
>> Clearly, if you can say a sound (or hiss a sibilant) for any length of
>> time, then it can be termed "long". If the airstream stops, and thus the
>> sound can not be said for any length of time, then there is really no such
>> thing as "long" for that sound.
>
> So you're saying that pauses don't have length?
Messages in this topic (15)
________________________________________________________________________
1f. Re: Phone*ic notation: Geminates
Posted by: "Eric Christopherson" ra...@charter.net
Date: Sun Feb 26, 2012 12:53 am ((PST))
On Feb 25, 2012, at 11:12 PM, Padraic Brown wrote:
> Right. Note that it's not the *stop* itself that is being extended for a
> space of time, but the silence that follows the stop.
Not so, at least in the case of voiced stops -- I was dissuaded from this point
of view by a discussion on this very list a few years ago -- in a long voiced
stop, the voicing continues for the length of the consonant, even if you're not
moving your lips or tongue. IIUC, though, voiceless stops do not allow this
possibility.
(In agreement with what I was told back then, I've found that it is much easier
to hold [b:(:...)] than [g:(:...)]; [d:(:...)] falls in between.
Messages in this topic (15)
________________________________________________________________________
1g. Re: Phone*ic notation: Geminates
Posted by: "Padraic Brown" elemti...@yahoo.com
Date: Sun Feb 26, 2012 4:13 am ((PST))
--- On Sun, 2/26/12, Eric Christopherson <ra...@charter.net> wrote:
> From: Eric Christopherson <ra...@charter.net>
> On Feb 25, 2012, at 11:12 PM, Padraic
> Brown wrote:
>
> > Right. Note that it's not the *stop* itself that is
> being extended for a
> > space of time, but the silence that follows the stop.
>
> Not so, at least in the case of voiced stops -- I was
> dissuaded from this point of view by a discussion on this
> very list a few years ago -- in a long voiced stop, the
> voicing continues for the length of the consonant, even if
> you're not moving your lips or tongue. IIUC, though,
> voiceless stops do not allow this possibility.
>
> (In agreement with what I was told back then, I've found
> that it is much easier to hold [b:(:...)] than [g:(:...)];
> [d:(:...)] falls in between.
I can see where you're coming from here -- if I keep pushing air while
holding my mouth and tongue in the [b] position, I do get some kind of
indeterminate vocalism. But I also get puffy cheeks and a mouthful of
highly pressurised air that must either be released into some horrible
kind of spittle ejecting superplosive, or else escape with a violent
snort through the nose!
I'll accept that some sort of sound *is* produced under such
circumstances, but I'm not yet all that convinced that what we're hearing
is a "long stop" so much as an obstructed vowel.
Now, what this line of discussion has led to is a wondering about using
such sounds (these horribly spittle ejecting superplosives with their
pre-onset pressure building obstructed vowels) as a distinct series of
consonants in parallel with the usual voiced, voiceless, aspirated. Will
have to find a spot for this in some conlang somewhere...
Kind of a neat series of sounds, if you ask me.
Padraic
Messages in this topic (15)
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
2.1. Re: Linguistic literature on conlangs
Posted by: "Padraic Brown" elemti...@yahoo.com
Date: Sat Feb 25, 2012 4:15 pm ((PST))
--- On Sat, 2/25/12, Michael Everson <ever...@evertype.com> wrote:
> >> One normally is not permitted to perform surgery and gene-therapy on
> >> someone else's child, though.
>
> > Not unless one is a surgeon or a physician. Surgeons regularly perform
> > surgery on someone else's children -- given that proper consent is
> > obtained and possible outcomes are discussed.
>
> One may imagine that the Tolkien Estate may take a dim view of
> Neo-Quenya.
As indeed would any parent take a dim view of someone doing needless
surgery without any kind of discussion, consent, etc.
Dunno how much control Tolkien's estate has, but Middle Earth Enterprises
seems to be the go to corporate body, should someone desire becoming a
licensee of some aspect of Middle Earth. A quick inquiry to them should
illuminate the true seeker soon enough.
> Michael Everson
Padraic
Messages in this topic (34)
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
3a. Re: from Roger
Posted by: "Padraic Brown" elemti...@yahoo.com
Date: Sat Feb 25, 2012 4:30 pm ((PST))
Hi Kim!
Thanks for letting us know! Please send Roger our best wishes for a
speedy recovery!
Padraic
--- On Sat, 2/25/12, Roger Mills <romi...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> From: Roger Mills <romi...@yahoo.com>
> Subject: [CONLANG] from Roger
> To: conl...@listserv.brown.edu
> Date: Saturday, February 25, 2012, 6:45 PM
> Hi, My name is Kim Shotwell and I am
> emailing to let you know that Roger Mills is in the hospital
> and won't be able to communicate with any of you for the
> time being. Please keep him in your thoughts and prayers. He
> has pneumonia and will have to go to re-hab in order to gain
> his strength back. Thanks and take care, Kim
>
>
> You can email me at kimshotw...@hotmail.com
> if you would like updates.
>
Messages in this topic (7)
________________________________________________________________________
3b. Re: from Roger
Posted by: "Scott Hlad" scotth...@telus.net
Date: Sat Feb 25, 2012 4:44 pm ((PST))
Many wishes for a speedy recovery!
Scotto
-----Original Message-----
From: Constructed Languages List [mailto:conl...@listserv.brown.edu] On
Behalf Of Padraic Brown
Sent: February 25, 2012 5:30 PM
To: conl...@listserv.brown.edu
Subject: Re: from Roger
Hi Kim!
Thanks for letting us know! Please send Roger our best wishes for a
speedy recovery!
Padraic
--- On Sat, 2/25/12, Roger Mills <romi...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> From: Roger Mills <romi...@yahoo.com>
> Subject: [CONLANG] from Roger
> To: conl...@listserv.brown.edu
> Date: Saturday, February 25, 2012, 6:45 PM
> Hi, My name is Kim Shotwell and I am
> emailing to let you know that Roger Mills is in the hospital
> and won't be able to communicate with any of you for the
> time being. Please keep him in your thoughts and prayers. He
> has pneumonia and will have to go to re-hab in order to gain
> his strength back. Thanks and take care, Kim
>
>
> You can email me at kimshotw...@hotmail.com
> if you would like updates.
>
Messages in this topic (7)
________________________________________________________________________
3c. Re: from Roger
Posted by: "Eric Christopherson" ra...@charter.net
Date: Sun Feb 26, 2012 12:44 am ((PST))
On Feb 25, 2012, at 5:45 PM, Roger Mills wrote:
> Hi, My name is Kim Shotwell and I am emailing to let you know that Roger
> Mills is in the hospital and won't be able to communicate with any of you for
> the time being. Please keep him in your thoughts and prayers. He has
> pneumonia and will have to go to re-hab in order to gain his strength back.
> Thanks and take care, Kim
>
>
> You can email me at kimshotw...@hotmail.com if you would like updates.
Roger, I wish you the speediest, fullest recovery (and I know I'm not alone in
that.)
Messages in this topic (7)
________________________________________________________________________
3d. Re: from Roger
Posted by: "Jeffrey Daniel Rollin-Jones" jeff.rol...@gmail.com
Date: Sun Feb 26, 2012 5:19 am ((PST))
Indeed. Get well soon Roger, and thanks Kim
Sent from my iPhone
On 26 Feb 2012, at 08:44, Eric Christopherson <ra...@charter.net> wrote:
> On Feb 25, 2012, at 5:45 PM, Roger Mills wrote:
>
>> Hi, My name is Kim Shotwell and I am emailing to let you know that Roger
>> Mills is in the hospital and won't be able to communicate with any of you
>> for the time being. Please keep him in your thoughts and prayers. He has
>> pneumonia and will have to go to re-hab in order to gain his strength back.
>> Thanks and take care, Kim
>>
>>
>> You can email me at kimshotw...@hotmail.com if you would like updates.
>
> Roger, I wish you the speediest, fullest recovery (and I know I'm not alone
> in that.)
Messages in this topic (7)
________________________________________________________________________
3e. Re: from Roger
Posted by: "Sam Stutter" samjj...@gmail.com
Date: Sun Feb 26, 2012 5:34 am ((PST))
I can't really add any more to what everyone else has said, so I won't try. Get
well soon, Roger.
Sam Stutter
samjj...@gmail.com
"No e na il cu barri"
On 26 Feb 2012, at 13:19, Jeffrey Daniel Rollin-Jones wrote:
> Indeed. Get well soon Roger, and thanks Kim
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On 26 Feb 2012, at 08:44, Eric Christopherson <ra...@charter.net> wrote:
>
>> On Feb 25, 2012, at 5:45 PM, Roger Mills wrote:
>>
>>> Hi, My name is Kim Shotwell and I am emailing to let you know that Roger
>>> Mills is in the hospital and won't be able to communicate with any of you
>>> for the time being. Please keep him in your thoughts and prayers. He has
>>> pneumonia and will have to go to re-hab in order to gain his strength back.
>>> Thanks and take care, Kim
>>>
>>>
>>> You can email me at kimshotw...@hotmail.com if you would like updates.
>>
>> Roger, I wish you the speediest, fullest recovery (and I know I'm not alone
>> in that.)
Messages in this topic (7)
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
4a. Re: Phonology Imitation
Posted by: "Peter Collier" petecoll...@btinternet.com
Date: Sat Feb 25, 2012 5:06 pm ((PST))
I think which of the two different approaches (lexis-down / phonology-up) are
going to work best for someone is going to depend on whether they are starting
from scratch, or working out some kind of cut-and-shut job using a language A
sound change body on a language B chassis, a la Wenedyk, Brithenig etc.
It will also depend on which aspect of the conlanging vice most floats your
boat. For me personally, it's more about the process than the end product. I
enjoy the whole diachronic sound change aspect, figuring out how I want a
language to evolve, running changes and seeing what serendipity or catastrophe
results. That means I am of necessity looking at phonology more than lexis.
Some of the other projects we read about on here don't have a chronological
aspect to them as such, they are more about using interesting, different or
unusual features to craft more complete languages with broader vocabularies
that can then be test-driven with translation exercises. For languages such as
these, while phonology is still important, it is the lexical aspects that are
to the fore and questions about whether that /f/ is [f], [p\] or [v_0] can be
brushed over.
P.
I recently presented a workshsop on language construction, and I took the first
approach--I had the workshop participants come up with twenty or so "words" in
their language and then reverse-engineered phonological inventories and
syllable structure from that. I think it worked pretty well, though some of the
participants were kinda stressed out about having to come up with twenty words
spontaneously. After seeing what they came up with, I realized that one danger
of this approach is that people who are linguistically naive tend to reproduce
something like English. This is where the second method can come in handy.
After creating a few words and distilling inventories and syllable
phonotactics, you could add sounds that are "obviously" missing, and to refine
the syllable canon and phonotactics.
But I am firmly of the opinion that the phonology should be intuitive, rather
than planned--at least in its initial stages. All of the languages I have ever
pursued beyond a simple one-page sketch started with a word or several words
that I thought sounded Just Right. For Miapimoquitch, that word was [tɨβa]. For
my current perpetually nascent project that word is [stubn̩]. It's been a lot
of fun to try to imagine what kind of language would allow a word like [stubn̩]
in itǃ
Dirk
On Sat, Feb 25, 2012 at 11:41 AM, Peter Collier
<petecoll...@btinternet.com>wrote:
> Broadly speaking there seem to be two different approaches to language
> construction. One is to coin some vocabulary and then to look at what
> you have and "reverse-engineer" a language from it. The other is to
> work at a phonological level rather than a lexical one, i.e. to work
> out how the language is screwed together first and then see what it
> leads to. By necessity, the "what-if" type conlangs - Brithenig and
> the like - would have to be of the second type.
>
> My own project is of the latter type so I don't have any experience of
> working the other way around, but logically there must come a point
> where things have to start getting a little more fixed and any new
> coinings start to comply with words you have already created,
> otherwise the thing is going to just keep on expanding to a ridiculously
> unwieldy state.
>
> As to making one language "feel" like another, it seems to me you need
> several things. Firstly, you need to have similar phonologies and
> phontactics. If you want something that sounds Germanic, you are going
> to need more fricatives and afficates in your phonology, a larger
> vowel inventory, and rules that allow for syllables with large
> consonant clusters.
> If you are looking to make something Romanic you'd want to be having
> more limited consonant clusters, fewer or no reduced vowels and so on.
>
> Secondly, the conlang's grammar and syntax would need to be similar.
> If you were trying to create a language that felt like English, you
> wouldn't want to have grammatical gender and adjectival agreements. If
> you want something of a Finnish feel, you'd need to be thinking about
> cases.
>
> Finally, orthography. To my mind this is the last thing you should
> consider, not the first, as it has nothing at all to do with the
> mechanics of the language. It is just an arbitrary arrangement of
> symbols for encoding the language in writing. However, that said, if
> you are trying to mimic the feel of a language you need to mimic its
> orthography. When you look at a Brithenig it appears at first glance
> to be Welsh and that’s part of what makes it such a delight.
>
> So my suggestion would be to look at the language(s) you want to
> emulate, determine what it is that gives them their "feel," and then
> use those aspects to lay down some founding criteria for your
> creation. Do that before you do anything else. Then it’s a question of
> creating a language within those self-imposed constraints.
>
> P.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Constructed Languages List [mailto:conl...@listserv.brown.edu]
> On Behalf Of Ian Spolarich
> Sent: 25 February 2012 03:56
> To: conl...@listserv.brown.edu
> Subject: Phonology Imitation
>
> I distinctly remember a thread here or somewhere where the poster had
> talked a bit about mimicking natural languages' phonologies in a
> conlang. I can't seem to find the email, so I thought I'd ask here:
> how does one truly make a conlang sound like another language or
> specific phonology?
>
> The thing is, when *I* conlang, I don't usually think about how one
> word will sound in context or what not, I usually think about what
> phonemes I can use and what sounds good. For one of my langs,
> "Csatau," I'm mimicking to an extent the Hungarian language--I have
> done so fairly easily in the phonology inventory (as well as the
> orthography, but really, who doesn't love the Hungarian alphabet?
> Although it should be noted that there is a corresponding native
> script and a script in another con-script made of Greek and Cyrillic
> letters... it's a complex country.), but I'm not sure how to achieve
> the overarching aesthetic "feel" of Hungarian.
>
> Also, besides making a conlang sound like I want it to sound, I tend
> to have trouble pronouncing the language--not because of the phonology
> but because of the sequence of sounds. For example, I had to change my
> numbers (originally "ská elt vec fört tüks fausz sal sval dvan..." to
> "ská elt föt tüks fau pes sval dvan") to make them easier to
> pronounce. Anyway, does anyone have any good tips on achieving a
> unified sound consistent across a whole language?
>
> -Ian Spolarich
>
Messages in this topic (9)
________________________________________________________________________
4b. Re: Phonology Imitation
Posted by: "Peter Collier" petecoll...@btinternet.com
Date: Sat Feb 25, 2012 5:10 pm ((PST))
Any language invented by my kids... they can be as stubborn as hell. *grin*
On 25 Feb 2012, at 21:29, Dirk Elzinga <dirk.elzi...@gmail.com> wrote:
[...] It's been a lot of fun to try to imagine what kind of language would
allow a word like [stubn̩] in itǃ
>
> Dirk
Messages in this topic (9)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/conlang/
<*> Your email settings:
Digest Email | Traditional
<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/conlang/join
(Yahoo! ID required)
<*> To change settings via email:
conlang-nor...@yahoogroups.com
conlang-fullfeatu...@yahoogroups.com
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
conlang-unsubscr...@yahoogroups.com
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
------------------------------------------------------------------------
